LESSON 2
From An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, 1789
Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and
pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine
what we shall do. On the one hand the standard of right and wrong, on the other the
chain of causes and effects, are fastened to their throne. They govern us in all we do, in
all we say, in all we think: every effort we can make to throw off our subjection, will serve
but to demonstrate and confirm it. In words a man may pretend to abjure their empire:
but in reality he will remain subject to it all the while. The principle of utility recognizes
this subjection, and assumes it for the foundation of that system, the object of which is
to rear the fabric of felicity by the hands of reason and of law.
Pain and pleasure are the two “sovereign masters” of the human being.
– The ultimate cause of a human’s action is to achieve a pleasure or to avoid a pain
The Principle of Utility is “that principle which approves or disapproves of every action
whatsoever, according to the tendency which it appears to have to augment or diminish
the happiness of the party whose interest is in question…”
By utility is meant that property in any object, whereby it tends to produce benefit,
advantage, pleasure, good, or happiness, (all this in the present case comes to the same
thing); or (what comes again to the same thing) to prevent the happening of mischief,
pain, evil, or unhappiness to the party whose interest is considered: if that party be the
community in general, then the happiness of the community: if a particular individual,
then the happiness of that individual.
To this end, Bentham came up with what he called a “felicific calculus,” that is, a “happiness
calculator, or counter.”
Bentham's Felicific Calculus
Consider the following circumstances to measure the value of pleasures and
pains an action can bring about:
1. Intensity: How strong is the pleasure?
2. Duration: How long will the pleasure last?
3. Certainty vs Uncertainty: How likely or unlikely is it that the pleasure will occur?
4. Propinquity vs Remoteness: How soon will the pleasure occur?
5. Fecundity: The probability that the action will be followed by sensations of the same kind.
6. Purity: The probability that it will not be followed by sensations of the opposite kind.
7. Extent: How many people will be affected?
One who is faced with deciding on whether an action is to be done or not must
ask oneself whether the action A will bring about greater X than an alternative
action B [“X” referring to one of the circumstances Bentham mentioned].
– Will action A bring about greater intensity of pleasure than action B?
– Will action A bring about the greater intensity of pain than action B?
– Ex: Eating a whole bag of chicken skin chicharon if you’re hypertensive and already have
coronary heart disease.
But if more than one of the circumstances are involved in an action, all the other
amounts of pleasure and pain must be accounted for
– Ex: Buying a new pair of rubber shoes (Brand N).
– One is therefore reminded that even a seemingly innocuous act might turn out to have
“systemic” effects (ex: to the environment, to conditions elsewhere, etc.)
If the net amount to be produced by an action leans towards pleasure rather than
pain, then action A is “good.”
A Mnemonic Device in verse form:
Intense, long, certain, speedy, fruitful, pure—
Such marks in pleasures and in pains endure.
Such pleasures seek if private be thy end:
If it be public, wide let them extend.
Such pains avoid, whichever be thy view:
If pains must come, let them extend to few.
Range of degrees of pleasure: 0 = no pleasure/neutral, 1 = least amount of pleasure --> 5 =
greatest amount of pleasure
Range of degrees of pain: 0 = no pain/neutral, 1 = least amount of pain --> 5 = greatest amount
of pain
Eat a whole bag of chicken skin Do not eat a whole bag of chicken
chicharon…[1] skin chicharon…[2]
pleasure pain pleasure pain
Intensity 5 5 2 0
Duration 3 3 4 0
Certainty vs 5 4 4 1
Uncertainty
Propinquity vs 5 3 4 1
Remoteness
Fecundity 2 4 3 1
Purity 2 4 4 1
Extent 1 5 5 0
TOTAL 23 28 26 4
GRAND TOTAL -5 22
NET EFFECT Do not eat a whole bag of chicken skin chicharon if you are
hypertensive and already have coronary heart disease.
[1] …if you’re hypertensive and already have coronary heart disease
[2] same condition as above
Clarification 1: Utilitarianism is NOT just a kind of “Cost-Benefit Analysis” (CBA):
– CBA is usually employed in business contexts, to determine what project will bring about
maximal profit for minimal cost, given alternatives
– Try not to simplistically assume that Utilitarianism and CBA are one and the same:
• Utilitarianism talks of extent: “the greatest good for the greatest number” of people affected by
the act, while…
• CBA is usually performed by one company in the context of competition and for the purpose of
profitability
Clarification 2:
– Utilitarianism does not limit the realm of “morality” to a specific, finite set of human acts
– Instead, the moral value of any human act is defined by the net consequence or effect that it
brings in terms of pleasure and pain
– This seems like a strength of the theory, since we are forced to think about even “amoral”
looking acts and determine their net consequence
• Ex: conspicuous consumption
